Posted on 09/02/2007 11:30:37 AM PDT by doug from upland
AN UNWANTED CAMPAIGN STOP FOR HILLARY IN 2008 - Los Angeles Superior Court
DATELINE Los Angeles
FreeRepublic.com
Doug from Upland
It is called the “Stanley Mosk Courthouse” after the man who was the longest serving justice on the California Supreme court, 37 years, from 1964-2001. The address is 111 North Hill Street, Los Angeles, California 90012.
During the campaign of 2008, Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton will be paying a visit, but it won’t be by choice. She won’t be sitting in the lawyer chair. She will be sitting in the witness/defendant chair.
The case is Paul v Clinton, an historic civil case involving an impeached former president and sitting senator accused of a committing business fraud and collapsing a public company, Stan Lee Media. Yes, “Spiderman” Stan Lee. The case is expected to highlight information over which the mainstream media has maintained a cone of silence. That information is the greatest campaign finance fraud in history and the compromising of all three branches of government by a senator whose power is second only to that of the President of the United States. Many journalists, newspaper editors, and TV and radio news shows are in possession of a wealth of information about the case that has been discussed on the phone with them and sent to them. It includes compelling documents, photos, and video of Hillary Clinton.
On September 7, 2007, a 3-judge panel of the California Appellate Court will hear oral arguments in the case. Despite having been alerted, the mainstream media has not seen fit to report that news. Apparently it did not meet the criteria pursuant to the masthead logo of the NY TIMES - “All the news that’s fit to print.” Some news is more fit than others.
Clinton counsel David Kendall of the powerful Washington DC law firm, Williams and Connolly, will endeavor to convince the three justices that his client is not a felon, should remain protected by California’s anti-SLAPP law, and should not join her husband and others as defendants. The court should quickly make its decision, and discovery can then proceed. If Kendall loses, he may appeal to the California Supreme Court. That procedure is not expected to be a lengthy one, and the court ruled previously that it would not throw out the case regarding the former impeached president.
*** For full disclosure and in fairness to Mr. Kendall, I can say unequivocally that I have not seen him sit on his briefcase during any of the hearings I've attended.
Even if she is not brought back into the case as a defendant, Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton is going to be under oath. At a hearing in 2006, the Superior Court trial judge, Aurelio Munoz told Kendall, “I will entertain no motion that prevents Mrs. Clinton from testifying……did you hear that, Mr. Kendall?”
The court case of a former impeached president and a sitting senator might normally be a headline generator. Unfortunately, the shameless partisanship of the mainstream media is on display as never before. It is there for everyone to see.
As background for those who may not be familiar with the issues in the case, that would be viewers of CBS, NBC, ABC, CNN, MSNBC and readers of the NY Times, Washington Post, Los Angeles Times, USA Today, Chicago Sun Times, Boston Globe, Denver Post, Dallas Morning News, Seattle Post Intelligencer, Detroit Free Press, Philadelphia Inquirer, Minneapolis (Red)Star Tribune, The Plain Dealer, the Arizona Republic, Houston Chronicle, St. Louis Post-Dispatch, Miami Herald, DesMoines Register, Arkansas Democrat Gazette, TIME Magazine, Newsweek, US News & World Report…….…well, you get the idea --- we are glad to be of service and welcome aboard. Here are some links that you might find helpful.
To anyone from the mainstream media who is just starting the learn about the greatest campaign finance fraud in history, I welcome you. We have regular and Decaf, and I’ll even supply some donuts. Get busy reading. Don’t you think it is about time to do your job? Does the word “journalist” mean something to you?
ALL OF THE DOCUMENTS: HILLCAP DOT ORG
EQUAL JUSTICE FOUNDATION SITE with latest documentary trailer: EJFA DOT ORG
THE TIMELINE: This tells the story with links
THIS ILLEGAL DONATION (with photos) FROM A JAPANESE NATIONAL HAS NEVER BEEN RETURNED OR REPORTED
THE LARGEST DONOR IN HISTORY HAS THREE TIMES DEMANDED THAT HILLARY RETURN HIS ILLEGAL DONATION
OH MY, "SPIDERMAN" STAN LEE ADMITTING TO "EXCHANGING CHECKS" IN HIS VIDEO DEPOSITION....WHOOPS!
THE SMOKING GUN VIDEO. An agent of Hillary, a White House employee, helped solicit a 1.6 mil in-kind contribution. This video is evidence of Hillary's knowledge, involvement, approval, and participation.
HILLARY'S CAMPAIGN FINANCE "IRREGULARITIES" REPORTED TO THE FBI FIELD OFFICE IN LOS ANGELES
HILLARY SPOKESMAN HOWARD WOLFSON HAS MAINTAINED THE LIE FOR SEVEN YEARS
TRUTH BOATING HILLARY CAMPAIGN - we need your help to break the news blockade of the mainstream media
ART MOORE'S WND STORY ABOUT THE TRUTH BOATING HILLARY CAMPAIGN
MOMMY DEAREST SETS UP CHELSEA FOR PERJURY
DO NOT MISS THE 7-PART "FRAUDULENT SENATOR" SERIES
AND FINALLY, JOIN ME IN A FUN SING-ALONG
Knock 'em Dead, Hillary! It is Hollywood, after all.
the drive by’s will hurt themselves trying to cover this one up.............watch
doug, it looks like that simmering cauldron has begun to bubble for sure!
I am speaking with three journalists who at least seem to be interested. Before the Hsu story, they didn’t give a damn. Now, people are starting to ask questions.
If they think the Queen has been wounded with the Hsu story, we have a brand new ball game.
Yes. It means "propagandist,' and their job is to report only that which fits the Democrat Marxist/Socialist agenda and template.
It’s going to be just like Kerry’s real Vietnam record. The MSM will complain about the Swiftboaters, all two hundred plus of them, and refuse to look into the charges.
I believe the major reason Imus was removed from the MSM was because he is a wild card when it comes to Hillary. He does not like her and was not afraid to say so. He had to be “assassinated” and he was.
This is ‘civil’, right? What happens if she is found guilty?
Could this be a perjury trap for Hillary? She will be under oath in a court of law. We know how careless Bill Clinton was when he was under oath in a court of law.
Since the Clintons don’t seem to take these things seriously, it’s quite possible Hillary will try to be less than truthful without outright lying. And then if no other charges come her way, the MSM will just bury this whole story.
Does anyone else here remember that, with the Monica Lewinsky story, that story was floating around on internet sites, Drudge report, etc. for months, but the MSM did not want to report on that story. Perhaps because the MSM wanted to work with the Clintons then and hope it would all go away?
While on the stand, I hope that Hillary is cross examined on every skeleton she has in her closet, including that of Vince Foster.<p.
Imus will be back. Perhaps he would like to be helpful. :)
If the judge is adamant on Hilery’s participation, his life may be in danger.
I am not kidding. People the Clintons oppose have a way of dying.
There will be new complaints to the FEC and Senate Ethics Committee. It is hoped that the civil trial is going to expose all the criminal behavior.
I understand about damages; but I’m asking if any criminal charges come of it all.
Big damage award. Peter lost 30 mil in stock when they destroyed his company.
I suspect Hillary will use her old stand-by “I can’t recall” “I don’t remember” blah, blah,blah. BTW who will be representing our side against David Kendall?
Psst, ask DFU about the plane that buzzed him ;)
Thanks for coming to visit, Sid. Now, go report to Hillary that the case goes forward and she indeed is going to be under oath.
Any laws or rules that will keep her from pursuing a Presidential bid?
Lots of zero’s. Ouch! That would really pierce Hillary’s heart. You know what a tightwad she is when it comes to their money.
If you truly believe that; then we might as well stop the Election 2008 process and bow down to her holiness now.
The only way nothing will change is if we all stop trying.
The beauty of this is that evidence is going to be presented in open court during the campaign. She has not made full disclosure to all of those donating money. They need to demand a refund.
We all know that she will never wear an orange jumpsuit, but what is going to happen to her natives when all of America finally sees the truth. When people like Streisand and Travolta and Cher are called to testify, this is going to get airplay.
Thank you, Doug, for all your tireless efforts. I pray to God that justice will be served and that the liberal baby-boomers’ dream candidate will be forever shut out of the Oval Office. Another Clinton presidency would destroy this nation. May the truth be revealed.
it’s just about time for Hillary to have another bad case of temporary amnesia
You’re a great American, Doug.
Did any of the Sunday talk shows pick up it today? Silly question, I know, but it doesn’t hurt to ask.
Will this be televised? It should be since the people are going to be, possibly, voting for her. The people have the right to know everything that goes on in that trial. They have the right to know everything about a Presidential candidate.
“I am speaking with three journalists who at least seem to be interested.”
Only 3?
Hey Doug, can you give me a link about how the Clintons destroyed Peter’s company? Thanks.
“I can’t recall”???? Isn’t that how they got Libby?
Depends on whether or not the DA wants to press them. A conviction in civil court is certainly a big help in a criminal court though.
>>>We all know that she will never wear an orange jumpsuit...
I think she will one day. The Hsu investigation is going to have ammo from this.
These folks were subpoenaed?
You might enjoy this. After claiming in her declaration that should could and would testify competently in the case, the next sentence was an absolute provable lie. She claimed that she met Peter Paul early in 2000.
In her deposition she will be confronted with home video footage of a fundraiser in early 2000 at the home of Zev Braun in Beverly Hills. On tape, she and Peter are recalling how they met in 1993 when he represented Fabio. He had Fabio chase her around the room and pick her up in a romance pose for photos. Bill even acknowledge the event in a speech the next year at the Italian American Foundation Dinner. Witnesses included Danny Devito and Dom DeLuise.
Would any of you fail to remember that for your sworn declaration. You don't make errors like that in a declaration. That is called lying.
As they said, if they loose this case, Hillary that is, they will take it to the California Supreme Court. If they loose there, does it not go to the 9th Circuit Court and from their to the United States Supreme Court? If so, I hope it ends up the the US Supreme Court. Keep this in front of the American people and bring out everything on the Clinton’s. Maybe this is the culmination of everything they have done to this country.
They will be subpoeaned to testify after the appellate hearing and discovery is allowed to proceed.
For those who might not know, a trial date had already been set for March 27, 2007. Peter delayed that because he wanted to appeal and bring Hillary back into the case. The timing might end up to be very bad for Hillary.
Peter Paul? Maybe the media would be more interested if it could be called the "Almond Joy" case.
>>>“I can’t recall”???? Isn’t that how they got Libby?
Yes. Obstruction Justice, which is the other consolation prize that a prosecutor goes for when he doesn’t get someone for the big one.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1873827/posts?page=17#17
Duncan Hunter: First I would not pardon or commune the sentenced without reading the transcript. Having said that, I think there are a couple of things the American people have to know and reflect on. Most of the citizens think that Mr. Libby was sentenced for the disclosing the identity of a CIA agent. That is not true. Ultimately the prosecutor understood that Libby was not the person that disclosed the identity of the CIA agent’s identity. He did not prosecute him for that. You may notice that. That is not what the conviction is for. The conviction was for inconsistent statements and lying to the prosecutor.
Now I think there is something that folks have to look at here and that is this. When prosecutors get into a high profile class, in which he was going to persue people for disclosing the identity of a CIA agent under the Foreign Agents Identity Disclosure Act. That is a law we put into place to keep people from being disclosed. This is a very serious thing so he starts off on this prosecution where he is going to, by gosh, bring people to justice for that. He ends up not doing that because he didn’t find a case where a person had their identity illegally disclosed, so he takes the consolation prize. The consolation prize is always perjury. It is lying to the grand jury. The point that I made the last time I was interviewed on this is this point. Tell me what you did 30 days ago. Tell me all the meetings you had 30 days ago. You probably can’t tell me. So if I ask you questions for 3 or 4 hours as a cross examining attorney, I could probably bring up places where you have not given all the information about things in fact happened on particular days because you can’t remember. Now Libby claims he couldn’t remember these things and after they asked him many questions, they got him for inconsistent statements or lying.
I think you always have to be careful about that. But I think in terms of Obstruction Justice, which is the other consolation prize that a prosecutor goes for when he doesn’t get someone for the big one. Which is what he pursued in the first place. They left Mr. Libby with $250,000 in fines and on probation. His law career is ruined he will be disbarred. He will never be able to practice law again. I think that is probably reasonable. But now my recommendation is this. I would not pardon Mr. Libby without reviewing the transcript. And I haven’t reviewed the transcript.
There is a simple solution so that it can proceed. If Kendall loses and plans to appeal and appeal —— Peter can simply drop her as a defendant and go to discovery. Bill is still a defendant, and she will be a witness. What we really want is her under oath.
If the DA doesn’t press them, can someone, anyone else?
The case is not being dismissed. It had already been set for trial, but it was delayed because of Peter. Hillary is really going to finally be under oath.
The Hsu case has opened it up and changed everything.
No idea, I’m an environmental engineer not a lawyer. Oh how I would love to see both of those two in stainless steel bracelets though. Can you imagine the hildabeest’s or bubba’s mug shot? Would the Secret Service have to be there in the jail as they are being booked, searched, fingerprinted and photographed?
God Bless You, Doug!!!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.